On Feb 3, 2014, at 8:21 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:
> If you want to use a name in DNS protocol slots, then you need a DNS
> name. You didn't get a DNS name, and instead you used a label
> that wasn't under your control.
This is the "you didn't follow process" argument. But they couldn't have followed process—there was no realistic process for allocating a special-use TLD before 6761 was published. So this amounts to an emotional appeal, which isn't much of a justification for the change you are demanding of them.
I absolutely get why you are saying this. It's a pretty good emotional appeal. But we shouldn't act on it, because that's all it is. We have a process, and they are following it. We should see it through.